I watched an excellent, and quite conclusive, debate tonight between left-wing celebrity Arianna Huffington and right-wing professor Victor Davis Hanson on the question: “Is America an Empire”?
If anyone is interested, you can view the 90-minute presentation here.
Quite a good expansion of the two sides’ positions. I am always interested in quality debate, even more so if it focusses upon matters of interest to me. A proper, structured debate between leading lights of opposing forces is very often a good way to test, question and expand one’s breadth of understanding of an issue, and I always listen closely to what the opposition has to say. Genuinely looking forward to the rest in the series. This kind of thing is a wonderful demonstration of the power of the internet to further education across classes and continents.
Actually, to be honest it’s not really a debate at all, it is a massacre. Huffington is totally outclassed – she couldn’t even stay on topic for two minutes before wandering into some misguided rant about Wal-Mart (!) or Hurricane Katrina (?). But where the hell are the real intellectuals of the left? I seriously want to hear some proper persuasion, one way or the other, on any number of interesting topics. I want to be challenged and hear opposing points. And instead we get Huffington – and this is the best she can do? It was embarrassing to watch. Nothing but a confused, rambling tirade about every disconnected “anti-bush” talking point she could think of. But the thing is, this is par for the course with the modern left.
This is the real reason the left is losing ground. Anyone who actually pays attention to what they are saying can’t avoid the conclusion: they are absolutely full of shit. How can they expect to get support when they just make it up as they go along?
Modern left thinking is nothing but a confused mess of half-truths, shallow and woefully inadequate analysis, rapidly changing topics, logical missteps, appeals to race and/or class, and sanctimonious bluster; whatever well-meaning ideals it supposedly started with. It is, quite simply, doomed.
September 19th, 2005 at 10:46 pm
I agree 100%. The left’s position on seemingly any political issue leaves a lot to be desired in terms of a foundational concept that can support a serious claim. It is always an appeal to the lowest common denomitators of society, a ‘victim of society’ approach to politics, themselves, and life in general. The modern left are the have-nots that seem to suffer from a form of ’short-man syndrome’. It seems to be a completely different level of operation.
September 19th, 2005 at 11:30 pm
I’ll add another class to the “have-nots” – and that’s the “haves-who-feel-guilty”.
September 20th, 2005 at 12:41 am
The Hanson/Huffington Debate
I was not lucky enough to be able to see or hear the matchup of Victor Davis Hanson and Arianna Huffington as they addressed the question Is America an Empire? Somehow I think that I may have an idea of
September 20th, 2005 at 11:37 am
I don’t think Arianna Huffington is much of a “left-wing celebrity” (and not only because I haven’t ever heard of her). According to Wikipedia, she describes herself as a “former right-winger”, does not normally support the democrats, and only in recent years “has moved closer to the Democratic Party” (and the American Democratic party is hardly “left wing”). She may be anti-Bush and anti-war but that’s hardly sufficient to make her “left wing”.
Incidentally, I haven’t watched the debate yet because my bandwidth is shaped. Will try to catch it later.
September 20th, 2005 at 2:31 pm
But ultimately, we’re all left-wing anyway.
Or at least, I am, to my surprise.
I’m sure that site is old news to you, but how did you rate, anyhow?
[edit - fixed the link - Sho]
September 21st, 2005 at 9:31 pm
Well, I did the political compass. I am 0.75 to the right on the horizontal (economic) scale and -1.33 on the vertical (social) scale. So it makes me slightly right wing economically, but slightly more libertarian than authoritarian.
September 21st, 2005 at 11:25 pm
I did that compass test some time ago, but forgot my results.
Anyway, I don’t much like it. For example, there is no scope for measuring foreign policy in that test – the very subject of the debate I was talking about.
Almost everyone I know is left on some things, right on others. They often contradict in their source, be it moral principle or practical necessity. In the end the terms are almost meaningless except in reference to what each group has claimed for its opinion – for any question, or group of related questions, one can usually discern the generally accepted “left” or “right” answer.
Basically for social policy i’m quite liberal until it turns into moral relativism and “everyone is a victim” and then it’s back to the right!
Ah, it seems impossible to define a consistent system for judging these things. I’ve given much thought to the matter with not much progress. Seems the only way to really state your position is to give a list of views on a list of subjects, and there’s precious little consistency or pattern in such a list. I hope to solve the work behind making such a list in due course